locked
My spin on the whole licenseing issue RRS feed

  • Question

  • With the infamous 10 user limit. Id like to see a few things

    (Realize im in the mentality of Joe Inept User for this example)

     

    1. Explain in the documentation to users how to to do a user rename for the client machines, so they can have multiple machines only taking up one account and the importance of this.....

     

    2. Allow for *dropbox* accounts.. that arent full fledged accounts... and dont take up a license as such... Thinking of back to the old days of Appletalk/Ethertalk networking where each machine had the ability to make a folder with read or read/write for a particular user with password and not do any other *sharing*.. Guest isnt really an option, because you dont want to possibly share ALL the files with people, (It be nice to be able to have friends be able to pick up a file/folder for *them* not just generically everyone (and having to re-password guest)

     

    3, Not have users reply with *Oh you can do this by adding another product or buying SBS... I tend to think this is a Smart-NAS and should act as such, and can handle the prosumer market...so out of the box functionality for such things is highly desired.. (Some forum user comes to mind)

     

    4.. Realize that the easy solution for a lot of new users problems is going to be Oh I just need to create another account... this should be stressed in the manual as not the ideal...

     

    5. Perhaps a *booster pack* of 5 licenses is avalible... or an add-on for file sharing to non-local users with their own login. There are also reasons why you would want multiple accounts for the same user... (Much to MS's chagrin, i know some people use OTHER Operating Systems and theres reasons not to mix the files...., also some of the plugins want a user account on the WHS box and do not know if this dips into the WHS Account pool)

    (Esp nice cuz my Prosumer Firewall has a 15 node license, at least WHS is flexible in that its 10 user limit is a user account limit

     

     

    Thursday, July 12, 2007 12:53 PM

Answers

  • I agree with everything SME said, as far as he went.

    While your idea of "dropbox" accounts sounds great, Windows Server 2003 doesn't support anything of the sort, and WHS uses the licensing model provided by the host OS (with application layer tweaks). So it ain't gonna happen.

    As for plugins that want a user account, I believe the 10 user limit is built in to the console, so there's no way around it for users managed by WHS. There doesn't seem to be a limit on the number of users in the SAM database on WHS, so you could probably create a services user with normal system management tools. Users created in the console will count against the 10 user limit.
    Thursday, July 12, 2007 9:46 PM
    Moderator
    1. Documentation is almost always good but to me that is intuitive and should be to anyone who currently has file sharing enabled.
    2. Every Computer running IIS has an an accout IUSER_%COMPUTERNAME% that is used for annonymous internet users, You just have to configure the computer to give IUSER_%COMPUTERNAME% access to your pictures and share the pictures through IIS.
    3. WHS doesn't do everything out of the box. There are some things that will require an add-in and some things that WHS can't or might not be the ideal solution for. I intend to and hope that other users will offer suggestions to third party or competing products when appropiate.
    4. Huh?
    5. Additional licences will not be a available at this time. MS has decided that 10 users and 10 computers is enough for WHS. (Of course at one time it was accepted that home users didn't need a multiuser multitasking 32bit OS that operated in protected mode with and a secure file system.) I'm sure that at some future point larger networks and domainwide authentication will be standard for homes as well as business and at that point whatever solution MS has for home servers will accomidate such a network.
    Friday, July 13, 2007 3:27 AM

All replies

  •  Jolted wrote:

    With the infamous 10 user limit. Id like to see a few things

    (Realize im in the mentality of Joe Inept User for this example)

    1. Explain in the documentation to users how to to do a user rename for the client machines, so they can have multiple machines only taking up one account and the importance of this.....

    2. Allow for *dropbox* accounts.. that arent full fledged accounts... and dont take up a license as such... Thinking of back to the old days of Appletalk/Ethertalk networking where each machine had the ability to make a folder with read or read/write for a particular user with password and not do any other *sharing*.. Guest isnt really an option, because you dont want to possibly share ALL the files with people, (It be nice to be able to have friends be able to pick up a file/folder for *them* not just generically everyone (and having to re-password guest)

    3, Not have users reply with *Oh you can do this by adding another product or buying SBS... I tend to think this is a Smart-NAS and should act as such, and can handle the prosumer market...so out of the box functionality for such things is highly desired.. (Some forum user comes to mind)

    4.. Realize that the easy solution for a lot of new users problems is going to be Oh I just need to create another account... this should be stressed in the manual as not the ideal...

    5. Perhaps a *booster pack* of 5 licenses is avalible... or an add-on for file sharing to non-local users with their own login. There are also reasons why you would want multiple accounts for the same user... (Much to MS's chagrin, i know some people use OTHER Operating Systems and theres reasons not to mix the files...., also some of the plugins want a user account on the WHS box and do not know if this dips into the WHS Account pool)

    (Esp nice cuz my Prosumer Firewall has a 15 node license, at least WHS is flexible in that its 10 user limit is a user account limit



    1) Documentation is always nice
    2) That's exactly what guest is for and you don't have to enable guest access for all folders.
    3) While you may not like some users' answers, sometimes there is another product that does what people want and sometimes SBS is that product.
    4) See  #1
    5) Again this isn't SBS, if you need more than 10, build a second WHS machine.It doesn;t matter what licensing options other sw has.

    Good luck...

    Thursday, July 12, 2007 7:39 PM
  • I agree with everything SME said, as far as he went.

    While your idea of "dropbox" accounts sounds great, Windows Server 2003 doesn't support anything of the sort, and WHS uses the licensing model provided by the host OS (with application layer tweaks). So it ain't gonna happen.

    As for plugins that want a user account, I believe the 10 user limit is built in to the console, so there's no way around it for users managed by WHS. There doesn't seem to be a limit on the number of users in the SAM database on WHS, so you could probably create a services user with normal system management tools. Users created in the console will count against the 10 user limit.
    Thursday, July 12, 2007 9:46 PM
    Moderator
  • Id appreciate SME if you refrained from commenting or making suggestions on threads I started..

     

    Your rhetoric is not conductive to discussion, If youd like to buy me a copy of SBS id be more than happy too, but as a Home user I shouldn't HAVE to, to do what I want..

    You just rehash your general opinions, hence why i made this comment in the suggestions area...

     

    Also you just rebutted Question 3..

    The key part of that statement was (Out of the box functionality for such things is highly desired.. (Some forum user comes to mind)

     

    SME. May I remind you this is a suggestion, and I don't expect it to be considered, but something for thought in a later release.

     

    THanks again

    Jolt

     

     

     

    Thursday, July 12, 2007 9:51 PM
  •  Jolted wrote:

    Id appreciate SME if you refrained from commenting or making suggestions on threads I started..



    You don't get to make that choice. These forums are open for all to reply. While you might WANT nothing but "yeah, me too" type replies, that just isn't reality.

    Good luck with that...

    Thursday, July 12, 2007 10:42 PM
  • You keep restating your personal opinion and its not appreciated.. Unfortunately I can't filter out your name from the newsgroups, or delete your postings from the threads I start

     

    Other users have a right to ther opinion too. Hence why I dont want you persoinally to keep stifling them with your negative comments and have asked you NOT to post to my threads...

     

    You act as if your a representative for Microsoft, yet you are clearly not.. In fact iv i didn't know better, your trying to act as if you are.. Did I make the suggestion to you? No... Nuff said... I threw it out in the open, but dont expect nor want you to try catching it just to push your opinion... Would be nice to hear what OTHERS think for a change..

     

    You might want to consider letting others answer and not be so quick to butt in with your two bit opinions... Show a little bit of maturity, okay?

     

    Friday, July 13, 2007 1:20 AM
  •  Jolted wrote:

    You keep restating your personal opinion and its not appreciated.. Unfortunately I can't filter out your name from the newsgroups, or delete your postings from the threads I start

    Other users have a right to ther opinion too. Hence why I dont want you persoinally to keep stifling them with your negative comments and have asked you NOT to post to my threads...

    You act as if your a representative for Microsoft, yet you are clearly not.. In fact iv i didn't know better, your trying to act as if you are.. Did I make the suggestion to you? No... Nuff said... I threw it out in the open, but dont expect nor want you to try catching it just to push your opinion... Would be nice to hear what OTHERS think for a change..

    You might want to consider letting others answer and not be so quick to butt in with your two bit opinions... Show a little bit of maturity, okay?



    While you're free to post your opinions, so am I, that's why the suggestions forum says "A place to discuss..." not "one-sided opinions only." Big Smile

    I've never claimed to represent MS, you're just exaggerating now. Stick out tongue

    Actually, you did make a suggestion to me, you suggested that I not reply to your threads, which, as I've explained, you don't get to make that choice.

    I'm not the one telling others to shut up in a public forum. Now you're whining because I reply too fast for you? Too bad, I suggest you grow up.


    Friday, July 13, 2007 1:53 AM
    1. Documentation is almost always good but to me that is intuitive and should be to anyone who currently has file sharing enabled.
    2. Every Computer running IIS has an an accout IUSER_%COMPUTERNAME% that is used for annonymous internet users, You just have to configure the computer to give IUSER_%COMPUTERNAME% access to your pictures and share the pictures through IIS.
    3. WHS doesn't do everything out of the box. There are some things that will require an add-in and some things that WHS can't or might not be the ideal solution for. I intend to and hope that other users will offer suggestions to third party or competing products when appropiate.
    4. Huh?
    5. Additional licences will not be a available at this time. MS has decided that 10 users and 10 computers is enough for WHS. (Of course at one time it was accepted that home users didn't need a multiuser multitasking 32bit OS that operated in protected mode with and a secure file system.) I'm sure that at some future point larger networks and domainwide authentication will be standard for homes as well as business and at that point whatever solution MS has for home servers will accomidate such a network.
    Friday, July 13, 2007 3:27 AM